|
Post by Kirsten on May 18, 2009 5:26:28 GMT -5
Someone made a thread for one of the other teams for the purpose of discussing the upcoming exile, and I'm stealing that idea.
We should discuss here who we plan on voting out and reasons why, and anything else regarding the upcoming exile.
This will keep the exile from being a surprise. This will allow players to defend themselves properly from attacks prior to exile, and this will allow us to get better reads on players by seeing who they suspect and why.
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 18, 2009 12:06:56 GMT -5
I think the Inactive vs Active discussion applies to us. I am like so tempted to vote off somebody inactive for this first exile just because like more than half the people in our team are like almost missing and barely even checked into the boards or something.
That is William and Gretchen. Amelia has sneaked in a post a while ago. Not sure about the rest.
|
|
|
Post by Oswald on May 18, 2009 12:17:02 GMT -5
Hey guys, just got back in town and am catching up on stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 18, 2009 12:19:45 GMT -5
Add Oswald to that list too.
|
|
|
Post by Oswald on May 18, 2009 12:23:56 GMT -5
Add me to what list? The Exile list?
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 18, 2009 12:32:10 GMT -5
spies6oswald: did you just add me to the Exile list? spies6MeiYun: yes i did spies6MeiYun: well technically its not an Exile list spies6MeiYun: its a list on who i think is inactive
...
spies6oswald: it just seems weird that we are talking and its clear I am trying to catch up and you know t hat and you nominate me or whatever spies6MeiYun: and you have like more than one day spies6MeiYun: lol look at it from my point of view spies6MeiYun: at least now you are obliged to 1. catch up spies6MeiYun: 2. share an opinion spies6MeiYun: both are pro-town spies6MeiYun: i dont know why you are stressing about it spies6MeiYun: bottomline is you better live up to you promise or else spies6MeiYun: and ill be here to direct you to some stuff you should do or read in case you want to catch up. as ive said read the Opening chat and do the tiebreaker thingy and post in kirstens thread
|
|
|
Post by Oswald on May 18, 2009 12:35:21 GMT -5
I am way in over my head here.
|
|
|
Post by Donald on May 18, 2009 13:16:36 GMT -5
This is a good thread to have.
I hate exiling inactives, because it's not actively hunting for spies, but if half of the team is inactive, there's something wrong.
But Sam also said that a lot of inactives said they wouldn't be here yesterday, but would arrive today. I've seen some posts from Oswald, so I assume he's in that group and could be an active. The other two on that list need to be prodded and looked at though. We don't have much time before the exile.
|
|
|
Post by Oswald on May 18, 2009 13:21:19 GMT -5
I did tell Sam I wouldn't be there, and I am here now. I have not seen Gretchen anywhere yet, but that doesn't mean she is a Spy either. Very puzzling.
|
|
|
Post by William on May 18, 2009 14:37:02 GMT -5
Hey all, here to check in, my first real look at the forums since the big kick-off. Still unsure how I feel bout everyone at this point...
|
|
Roxy
Roxy
Dead Queen Bitch.
Posts: 50
|
Post by Roxy on May 18, 2009 15:34:43 GMT -5
The Inactive idea is a good point, but it might be a bad choice as they are most likely citizens. I don't know. :-\
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 18, 2009 15:36:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Levi on May 18, 2009 17:05:51 GMT -5
I'm here. This thread is a very good idea, but I'm not too keen on neccessarily lynching a lurker. That tends to help Spies later in the game. An early lurker lynch wouldn't be too disastrous, and it would give us more information on the other, more active individuals.
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 18, 2009 17:30:28 GMT -5
I'm here. This thread is a very good idea, but I'm not too keen on neccessarily lynching a lurker. That tends to help Spies later in the game. An early lurker lynch wouldn't be too disastrous, and it would give us more information on the other, more active individuals. Disastrous? Are you kidding me? In the long run, it is better to keep active players. Here is the deal: 1. You are implying we keep lurkers, which kinda encourages lurking, even this early on the game. 2. You are forgetting that we have game events that will keep on happening. That means --- A. For active players: more information for/against their cases. --- B. For lurker players: nothing. Because they would not attend or talk that much. 3. Some of us would probably waste investigations or other similar powers or opportunities on lurkers because we absolutely have Zero read on them. Take the Bunni Trial (in Spies 4) for instance. That was a whole waste of a possibly good episode against the Spies. Or maybe, the Jordan investigation (in Spies 3). Maybe like we only have different definitions for the word "lurker". Read it through and think about it. Unless somebody comes up with like a better tell or idea, I am probably sticking with what I have here.
|
|
|
Post by Kirsten on May 18, 2009 17:37:35 GMT -5
I'm kind of torn on this one.
Benefits to lynching an inactive: Removes dead weight. Keeps us from lynching an active player who could provide a useful contribution to the game. Any evidence for lynching someone is probably going to be fairly flimsy this early in the game.
Benefits to lynching an active player: We're lynching someone who we suspect is a spy, in hopes of getting rid of one. We'll have more information to go off of for the next episode, because people will actually have interactions with the exiled player.
Right now, I'm leaning toward removing an inactive, unless a good suspect emerges. With how little time and interaction we will have prior to this exile, I think our chances of catching a spy are low.
|
|
|
Post by Kirsten on May 18, 2009 18:11:01 GMT -5
If Sam is willing to replace inactives, then I would rather lynch a lurker over an inactive, and move to have the inactive replaced. If he won't replace, then now is the best time to remove dead weight.
|
|
|
Post by Donald on May 18, 2009 18:28:08 GMT -5
My definitions of lurker/inactive (which I should post in Mei's thread) are:
Lurker - is here, posts enough to fly under the radar and not look inactive, but doesn't participate or contribute to what's going on.
Inactive - Isn't here, occasionally pops in, but not enough to do anything, doesn't even read to know what's going on.
An inactive player should be replaced, which is much greater than lynching a more or less random player. I don't think we should lynch inactives.
Spies could benefit from active lurking. They know what's going on, can pipe up if they gain heat, but otherwise don't participate so they don't arouse suspicion. In this way, they "fly under the radar" until late game when they control a large number of the town. So lynching lurkers I can agree with, lurking is suspicious.
The alternative is lynching an active. We would do this because the player is suspicious and we think him/her is a spy. If we don't have any suspicious active players, we should lynch a lurker. If we do, we should weigh the suspicions of the active player against the suspicious actions, or lack thereof, of the lurker(s).
|
|
Roxy
Roxy
Dead Queen Bitch.
Posts: 50
|
Post by Roxy on May 18, 2009 19:45:30 GMT -5
Yeah, I would much rather lynch a lurker than inactive. Kind of pointless if they are going to get eliminated anyway, right?
|
|
|
Post by Levi on May 18, 2009 21:00:18 GMT -5
I haven't met Boris, Oswald, Gretchen, or Amelia yet. Out of those who I have met, I have a couple suspects, but I won't voice them just yet until I meet a few more people.
|
|
|
Post by William on May 18, 2009 21:16:07 GMT -5
The thing about lurking is that it never helps the citizens. I apologize if I have been lurking myself the past day, I've got a case of the day one "I don't know what to do"s.
I'm going to be on aim as much as I can tonight and tomorrow to meet the team.
I do think a lurker lynch may be good, but as Donald and others said someone who hasn't posted at all should be replaced instead of exiled.
|
|
|
Post by Amelia on May 18, 2009 22:12:36 GMT -5
I have to say that I think lynching Lurkers is a bad idea. Yes they might be Spies waiting in the wings, but they could also be crucial special Citizens who are trying not to draw the Imprisonment.
We need to hunt for Spies, not worry about who's lurking and who's inactive. At least not right now. Lurking isn't so bad at the moment and, again, I've seen it backfire and out a good special many times.
|
|
|
Post by William on May 18, 2009 23:02:23 GMT -5
I know you're just saying hypotheticals, but I don't think we should encourage people with roles to sit back. Letting the spies scare us into not speaking up robs us of our only advantage.
|
|
Boris
Boris
Idle Piece of Shit
Posts: 50
|
Post by Boris on May 18, 2009 23:03:10 GMT -5
I haven't met Boris, Oswald, Gretchen, or Amelia yet. Out of those who I have met, I have a couple suspects, but I won't voice them just yet until I meet a few more people. Levi, I would very much like to be meeting you some time soon. I feel we have much to discuss, especially our play in the mafia game earlier yesterday. (not ominous)
|
|
Boris
Boris
Idle Piece of Shit
Posts: 50
|
Post by Boris on May 18, 2009 23:15:33 GMT -5
I know you're just saying hypotheticals, but I don't think we should encourage people with roles to sit back. Letting the spies scare us into not speaking up robs us of our only advantage. I would very much like to be seconding this opinion. The spies will most likely be running the gamut of active range, from very loud to very quiet. The idea that anyone at the beginning with an opinion is a spy is both fear mongering and wrong. The same logic applies to the issue of the inactive. They are a time sink, and hog the spotlight. They will either be replaced, or idle out. If they are lurking though (active but keeping quiet) then I feel we have a different issue on our hands. They are causing great harm to the game by not allowing us to know of their thoughts on matters such as this.
|
|
|
Post by William on May 18, 2009 23:32:20 GMT -5
I am way in over my head here. Hey, we're all in over our heads, that's why we're grasping at straws. I think it's important we don't get discouraged because the beginning is really hard with so little to go on. Oswald, do you think you'll be online tuesday or wednesday? You're one of the few I haven't talked to yet over AIM and I would really like to chat with all team members at least once before exile.
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 19, 2009 0:01:13 GMT -5
I know you're just saying hypotheticals, but I don't think we should encourage people with roles to sit back. Letting the spies scare us into not speaking up robs us of our only advantage. This is actually better. Now we have like everyone except one from our team who has spoken and shared what they think on what is happening. With that, I think we should have a group chat tomorrow and figure this out. I will be online tomorrow night and I hope we can make a good decision together.
|
|
|
Post by Mei Yun on May 19, 2009 0:07:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I would much rather lynch a lurker than inactive. Kind of pointless if they are going to get eliminated anyway, right? Roxy, what did you mean by this? Can you rephrase?
|
|
|
Post by Kirsten on May 19, 2009 0:13:14 GMT -5
I have to say that I think lynching Lurkers is a bad idea. Yes they might be Spies waiting in the wings, but they could also be crucial special Citizens who are trying not to draw the Imprisonment. We need to hunt for Spies, not worry about who's lurking and who's inactive. At least not right now. Lurking isn't so bad at the moment and, again, I've seen it backfire and out a good special many times. I disagree about the lurking aspect. If we assume that anyone lurking could be someone with a role, then we're facilitating the environment where spies can get away with lurking. With that being said, I actually think that the spies are *not* lurking this episode. This is the easiest time in the game for spies to be active, combined with the fact that most teams are looking to exile a lurker or inactive. So here's the dilemma I have. I want to get rid of lurkers because I want to play the game with other active people who will contribute more and be easier to read and help to catch spies. I also do not want to get lurkers, because I think our chances of hitting a spy amongst them are abysmally low.
|
|
|
Post by William on May 19, 2009 0:17:07 GMT -5
spies6oswald: did you just add me to the Exile list? spies6MeiYun: yes i did spies6MeiYun: well technically its not an Exile list spies6MeiYun: its a list on who i think is inactive ... spies6oswald: it just seems weird that we are talking and its clear I am trying to catch up and you know t hat and you nominate me or whatever spies6MeiYun: and you have like more than one day spies6MeiYun: lol look at it from my point of view spies6MeiYun: at least now you are obliged to 1. catch up spies6MeiYun: 2. share an opinion spies6MeiYun: both are pro-town spies6MeiYun: i dont know why you are stressing about it spies6MeiYun: bottomline is you better live up to you promise or else spies6MeiYun: and ill be here to direct you to some stuff you should do or read in case you want to catch up. as ive said read the Opening chat and do the tiebreaker thingy and post in kirstens thread I wanted to talk to you about this last night before you signed off Mei, but I guess I should say it publicly anyways. I think you're being a bit too harsh on Oswald here, maybe a bit bossy. Unless he did ask for lots of help, you may be pushing him too hard, even if you have good intentions. Ignoring the whole lurkers thing, I think this is the most suspect thing happening in the team, especially after you put him on the inactive list right AFTER he posted. This may sound aggressive, but we won't find out who the spies are if we stay in our comfort zones.
|
|
|
Post by Donald on May 19, 2009 0:21:43 GMT -5
Aside from encouraging cits with roles to lurk, if that talk did get a few cits lurking, then the spies would probably start imprisoning them. I know you're just saying hypotheticals, but I don't think we should encourage people with roles to sit back. Letting the spies scare us into not speaking up robs us of our only advantage. This is actually better. Now we have like everyone except one from our team who has spoken and shared what they think on what is happening. With that, I think we should have a group chat tomorrow and figure this out. I will be online tomorrow night and I hope we can make a good decision together. Tomorrow night I'll try to be on. I may have a meeting before, but I'll be there at some point and time that night.
|
|